An examination of childcare practices within a contemporary hunter-gatherer community illuminates a significant drawback of the nuclear family structure and may offer insight into the prevalent parental exhaustion experienced in affluent Western nations.
A research collective, spearheaded by evolutionary anthropologist Nikhil Chaudhary of the University of Cambridge, posits that infants might be “evolutionarily predisposed” to require a greater degree of attention and nurturing than can be supplied by a dyadic parental unit alone.
In their investigation of the Mbendjele hunter-gatherers, who inhabit the northern rainforests of the Republic of Congo and sustain themselves through hunting, fishing, foraging, and honey extraction, the researchers identified an extensive network of caregivers.
Observations of eighteen infants and toddlers within this society revealed that each child typically received, on average, nine hours of focused care and physical proximity daily, often from approximately ten individuals, and occasionally from upwards of twenty.
The substantial number of individuals attuned to an individual child’s requisites meant that an infant’s cries were generally addressed within a mere twenty-five seconds.
The biological mother was responsible for approximately half of these episodes of infant distress. On other occasions, a different individual provided care, frequently an elder child or an adolescent.
While this singular contemporary African community may not perfectly mirror all historical hunter-gatherer societies, its caregiver-to-child ratio bears resemblance to those found in other extant hunter-gatherer groups.
Though these cultures are firmly rooted in the present and are not literal “remnants of antiquity,” they can furnish vital indications regarding the potential societal configurations that existed over ten millennia ago, preceding the advent of agriculture.
For a considerable expanse of human history, our species has subsisted as hunter-gatherers. This implies that throughout the majority of human existence, maternal and paternal figures likely benefited from substantially more collaborative support in child-rearing than is typical in most affluent, Western countries today.
Quantifying the extent of this difference in support is challenging.
To date, the bulk of research pertaining to child bonding has been confined to Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) populations, thereby limiting experts’ comprehension of the complete spectrum of human developmental experiences.
Among certain contemporary hunter-gatherer groups, such as the Mbendjele and the !Kung of southern Africa, there appears to be an exceptionally high level of responsiveness to distressed infants.
Conversely, within WEIRD societies, the degree of responsiveness seems to be diminished.
“If an individual currently encounters comparatively reduced access to [caregiving], this could trigger innate psychological mechanisms associated with hardship (which may or may not remain adaptive); or, if access is sufficiently limited, it might precipitate psychological dysregulation,” Chaudhary and his collaborators propose.
This theory necessitates further in-depth investigation. Dr. Chaudhary himself emphasizes that human psychology is inherently adaptable, suggesting that a singular lifestyle paradigm may not be universally optimal for health and well-being.
However, it is unequivocally established that the nuclear family model, as articulated by Chaudhary, represents “a stark departure from the communal living arrangements characteristic of hunter-gatherer societies like the Mbendjele.”
“Cries were virtually invariably met with a response, typically with promptness; and these responses generally involved soothing or nourishment, seldom stimulation, and never control,” the research team states.
In contrast, within WEIRD societies, parents typically bear the sole responsibility for addressing an infant’s distress, a situation that can foster profound exhaustion or depression.
Whether these divergent childcare systems demonstrably exert detrimental effects on children or parents remains indeterminate and warrants additional comparative investigation.
The investigators involved in the present study advocate for future research to explore the psychological development and overall well-being of hunter-gatherer children in contrast to their WEIRD counterparts, as well as to scrutinize potential distinctions between maternal care and care provided by non-maternal individuals.
“As a collective society, encompassing policymakers, employers, and healthcare services,” Chaudhary observes, “we must collaborate to ensure that mothers and their children receive the essential support and care required for them to flourish.”
The findings of this study have been disseminated in Developmental Psychology.
